Comfort women bill approved by US congress!
Posted by Matt Dioguardi on July 31st, 2007
Not unexpectedly, the US house has approved the comfort women resolution.
I strongly disagree with this resolution. I very much understand that resolutions like this are par for the course these days in Washington, but personally I think resolutions like this are pro-war. You don’t tell other countries, especially allies how to deal with difficult and complex problems. It will be interesting, if not unsettling, to see what the reaction is to the resolution. (Here are some reactions from when the bill was approved by the foreign relations committee.)
Let’s see how many people on the left are all too happy to accept foreign interventionism, so long as they agree with the purpose of the intervention. Let me spell this out for those who don’t understand what I am implying. Japanese nationals, especially politicians, should want the sovereignty of their country respected, and on principal should reject all interventions. However, I am sure that because many politicians on the left approve of the contents of the resolution, they will not pay any attention to the sovereignty issue. Had the bill said Japanese should go to church more often, of course, a different reaction would be expected. But the issue is not what America is telling Japan to do, it’s that America is telling Japan what to do!
Note the resolution explicitly tells the Japanese government how to educate its future generations. US congressmen do not even have the inherent right to tell parents how they will educated their children in America, much less Japan. Are we all Fascists these days? Imperialists? People really need to wake up on this issue.
Let’s see how many people on the left who reject interventionism in Iraq, and American imperialism in general, are all to happy to exuberantly embrace it here. Let’s see how many Japanese are good imperial subjects when it suits them.
Article and link follow ….
- U.S. House OKs sex slave resolution
The U.S. House of Representatives approved a resolution Monday demanding an apology from Japan over its military’s sexual enslavement of young women in Asia during World War II.
The House Foreign Affairs Committee overwhelmingly had passed the resolution on the victims, known in Japan euphemistically as ”comfort women,” on June 27.
Rep. Michael Honda, a California Democrat of Japanese descent, and some Republicans submitted the nonbinding resolution in January. Tokyo claims Japanese prime ministers have repeatedly offered apologies in connection with the sex slavery.
Japanese Ambassador to the United States Ryozo Kato has warned that the passage of what he says is a factually unfounded resolution will harm otherwise sound Japan-U.S. relations.
The resolution drew more than 140 cosponsors from both the Democratic and Republican parties. It urges Tokyo to ”formally acknowledge, apologize and accept historical responsibility in a clear and unequivocal manner” for the sexual mistreatment of the women.
Similar resolutions have been submitted to Congress four times. The last resolution won committee-level approval in September, but a full vote by the lower chamber was blocked by the then majority Republican Party.
Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe has offered an apology for the women’s suffering. He has also repeated that he stands by 1993’s official statement acknowledging and apologizing for the sex slavery.
Abe came under fire earlier this year when he appeared to doubt the Japanese military coerced women into brothels for its soldiers.
During his visit to the United States in April, Abe expressed regret about ”misunderstandings” over his remarks and reiterated he feels sorry for the women who suffered.
President George W. Bush said after talks with Abe at the time that the comfort women issue ”is a regrettable chapter in the history of the world and I accept the prime minister’s apology.”
July 31st, 2007 at 5:25 am
There’s a big difference between recommending that another country do something, and forcing it to do something. The comfort women resolution doesn’t take any steps to force Japan to apologize, it simply urges Japan to do so. I don’t think that should be confused with, say, the Iraq war.
July 31st, 2007 at 7:57 am
[…] I’m pretty much in total agreement with the analysis that has been posted over at Liberal Japan. […]
July 31st, 2007 at 8:58 am
Thanks for the news.
No thanks, however, for the facile and erroneous analogizing by means of the foggy notion of “interventionism.” What the US neo-cons did in Iraq–an illegal and incredibly violent take-over of an entire nation, which followed on the heels of years of a devastating bombing and economic isolation campaign against the people of Iraq that was sanctioned by the Bush Sr. and Clinton regimes–cannot without absurdity and dishonesty be likened to Resolution 121. The former is a clear case of militarism gone mad. The latter, however, is not “pro-war,” as you said without justifying the point. It is clearly a condemnation of one aspect of a very pro-war fascist government from the 1930s and early 1940s.
Your inability to see any clear difference between these glaringly different cases leads you to see “fascism” and a “pro-war” sentiment in a Resolution that shows neither.
If there is so little incitement to war in the Resolution, it is because the two states in question, Japan and U.S., are so strategically interwoven that recourse to early 20th-century “anti-interventionist” argumentation to criticize the Resolution is at best an outmoded tactic. While the quasi-religious notion of sovereignty has not been entirely abandoned and, especially in the face of mounting corporate globalism, still may play an important role of limiting corporate take-over of government services and responsibilities, it is absurd to see the Resolution as an assault on Japanese “sovereignty.” It is even more absurd to then swiftly liken this “assault” to the unbridled cruelty and violence that has been carried out in Iraq over the past 17 years for purely self-serving motives by successive US regimes.
All that being said, I do not support the Resolution, either. My objection does not stem from the nostalgic adoration of “sovereignty” that seems to have inspired you; rather, it comes from my sense that the very idea of a forced apology is paradoxical. If one is obliged to apologize, can one really ever apologize? And that’s not even to bring into the equation the important question of who should apologize in this case. Is the Abe government capable of apologizing for the crimes in question? Is it its duty? Its right? None of those points are clear to me.
What is clear to me, however, is that demanding of other major economic and political allies that they not willfully distort history to cover over human rights abuses is not a case of “state interventionism.” Then again, Japan’s current government could just as easily pass a resolution today demanding of the U.S. gov’t that it condemn its brutal, illegal, and unnecessary recourse to unleashing atomic weapons on civilian populations in Japan. And it could just as easily resolve that the U.S. gov’t stop teaching its citizens that such illegal and inhumane violence was justified or that it “saved lives” (so the Orwellian, and indeed, historically unjustifiable doctrine goes).
In either case, though, I would argue that the crypto-Christic language of “apology” and “forgiveness” should be dropped from the discourse. It has no place in international relations, and certainly not when presented in the mode of obligation.
Fanni Terrette
July 31st, 2007 at 10:31 am
That’s exactly one of the seemingly infinite reasons why this bill never should have passed in the first place. If the bill is non-binding, then what’s the point of passing it? It’s nearly a pat on the back from the house to the house saying, “good job on getting those guys” when really nothing is done. If the house truly stood by this, then they should go ahead and proclaim all the treaties Japan has signed that otherwise fully and legally absolve it from further responsibility are void. Then watch as those same treaties also are the ones that absolved America from it’s war-time responsibilities and let America also stand up to it’s past. (Not just talking about the war-time bombings, but the peace-time
bombingstesting in the Marshall Islands that the US government has yet to take any steps to make good to the people, or the Japanese that again suffered by contaminated fish, and the nuclear fall-out that drifted their way.) Honda has proposed this bill many-a-times, and every time it has failed. But what’s different this time is the need to deflect attention away from America crimes in Iraq of today, and draw attention to Japan’s crimes in Asia of yesterday. That shouldn’t work since Japan has already apologized and made amends for it’s crimes, so the only choice the US is left with is to pretend that never happened on continue on with it’s meaningless non-binding resolutions.July 31st, 2007 at 1:16 pm
Matt,
I think you’ve gone over the top with the rhetoric here. It’s a non-binding resolution. It’s purely symbolic and has no legal or military threat of force behind it. The US government isn’t telling Japan what to do and how to do it, or else.
Fascists? Imperialists? People really need to wake up on this issue? This is the cheap rhetoric of the right wing in Japan. You don’t happen to drive a black van with loudspeakers on it, do you?
I do agree, however, that this resolution is stupid and pointless, and only serves to irritate America’s allies.
July 31st, 2007 at 1:37 pm
Peter,
When did Mr. Honda first introduce his first bill? And how many times did he do this exactly, every year since when? Is the language in each bill exactly the same? Do you think his views changed over time, especially since the first time, which I assume was in the 1990s?
Sorry for all the questions, but maybe by learning the history behind this, it might help our understanding. I guess Honda has been in Congress a long time and just thinks persistence pays off.
Also has he always held a hearing on the issue and invited supposed comfort women? Does Congress pay for this?
July 31st, 2007 at 3:30 pm
Allies are dictated by business and thus China is much closer an ally than Japan is, hence how Honda was even funded
July 31st, 2007 at 4:04 pm
Tinkerbell,
I did a quick search and found this article from Korea’s Chosun Ilbo, which says:
However I recall the number being greater than 2, but that could just be a mistake on my part.
I believe this time was the first time the former ‘comfort women’ were invited to speak. Which is a rather interesting turn of events really. The proposed victims are allowed to present their case, and based on that alone judgement is passed? What ever happened to the defendant being allowed to defend themselves? In this case, the plaintiffs words are taken at 100% face value and the defendants words aren’t even heard. The more I think about it, the more and more anti-American values this bill becomes.
July 31st, 2007 at 4:04 pm
BTW, great name
July 31st, 2007 at 4:08 pm
Viny:
Imagine if Japan passed some bill calling for America to apologize and make amends for the treatment of the native Americans, completely avoiding the fact that America has already done so, and making no mention what so ever as to why what has already been done doesn’t count, and what needs to be done in order for it to count. And then imagine Japan saying, “It’s a non-binding resolution. It’s purely symbolic and has no legal or military threat of force behind it. The Japanese government isn’t telling America what to do and how to do it, or else.” It’s nothing more than being an ass, like perhaps walking up to some girl on the playground and saying, “you’re the ugliest person here, but looks don’t matter.” If looks don’t matter, then why say anything in the first place? If your words carry absolutely no meaning (non-binding), then why say anything?
July 31st, 2007 at 6:28 pm
Every year the US passes a resolution condemning China’s poor human rights record, and every year China points the finger back: the US has no business doing so, it an attack on Chinese sovereignty, the US has got its facts wrong, it is imperialistic, the US is in fact guilty of other crimes …. The list of excuses goes on and on. It even issues an annual report on human rights abuses in the US. It does everything except reflect on the criticism.
Hey, all those Congressional reports and resolutions condemning human rights abuses are non-binding, so they must useless right? They can’t possibly be pushing China to do something about its abysmal record?
So surprising that Japan’s rightists and their supporters are beginning to resemble their Chinese communist neighbors.
July 31st, 2007 at 7:58 pm
Thanks Peter Pan, but that’s not what I’m talking about. My point is that by invoking fascism, imperialism, and somehow linking the resolution to sovereignty and Iraq cheapens the argument to the point where what is being said is indistinguishable from the rhetoric of the right wing nationalists in Japan.
Seriously, “foreign intervention?” When’s the invasion?
“Comfort women bill approved by US congress!” It’s a resolution, not a law.
“Note the resolution explicitly tells the Japanese government how to educate its future generations. ” Hogwash. The resolution makes no such claims.
Arguments are much more forceful and convincing without the hyperbole.
August 1st, 2007 at 12:00 am
Vimy, I encourage you to use the search feature in your browser and discover all of those things you are quoting me on were never in fact said by me. Arguments are more forceful and convincing without the misquoting/fabricated quotes.
Now, regardless, do you disagree that Japan should be allowed to defend/state it’s case in the House just as those bringing up the discussion are allowed to present their case? Is that not the way our democratic system is supposed to work? Regardless of which argument you think to be factually correct, I hope you can not deny the clear fact of the matter that the process in which America is playing the court of the world, and a poorly run on (at least by American standards) at that where only the plaintiff is allowed to present their case and the defendent is attacked for defending themselves without the argument’s even being heard. The House has created an even bigger straw-man in the place of Japan than you have with your ‘quotes’ from me.
Danova, you do also have to admit that trying to compare Japan and China on this issue is silly. Not because of any difference or similarities in what is being charged against them, but because you’re essentially saying that either everything America says is 100% right, or 100%, no in-between. If I say the House’s decision to pass this bill on Japan is wrong, that does in no way mean I’m saying anything at all about China. There are virtually no issues in the world that can be so easily broken into black and white, and the world of politics is by no means an acceptation to that rule. Each and ever decision made by any government, any individual in any government must be examined on a case-by-case basis, and any correlation between to events must be made, and must not be assumed. What does China’s human rights record have anything to do with Japan? Probably less than America has to do with the comfort women issue that is really only between Japan and the former comfort women.
August 1st, 2007 at 3:03 am
Matt, you’re catching a lot of flak here, and I won’t add to it. But, I’ll say what I’ve been saying all along: Tempest in a teacup. This resolution means nothing, does nothing, and serves no real purpose in terms of foreign policy. The executive branch, not the legislative, sets foreign policy in America.
The only good I see in the process was the opportunity to keep human rights issues alive in popular discourse. Of course, this is hardly the only issue worth discussing.
When it’s all said and done, the Japanese government is to blame for this being passed. Their reaction to it, and especially the full-page Washington Post ad, guaranteed that the resolution would pass…
Maybe it’s what they wanted?
August 1st, 2007 at 9:24 am
Peter Pan, sorry about those quotes. They are not yours and are from Matt’s blog post. My bad for thinking that the source of the quotes was obvious.
August 1st, 2007 at 2:33 pm
Of course it’s Pro-War! This is coming from the USA, for Christ’s sakes!
The winner of wars will always push the loser around. As simple as that.
Go ahead, USA - make them pay. It’s taken you this long to make the country you pummeled into paying for the same whores that your troops used after you took over. Go ahead and wipe that away. We’ll be watching to see Asia annihilate itself from the comfort of our cafes here in Europe. Yeah, thanks USA. We’ll clean up the mess for you, AGAIN.
August 1st, 2007 at 4:24 pm
You addressed me and then put in quotes, no where did you mention Matt in the comments. Even if you did not intent to make it look as though those quotes were mine, you have to admit that to someone reading the comment, that’s the way it would look. It’s very easy to get people’s comments mixed up on a thread like this because there is no ‘face’ to put the comments too. However I don’t like the way you are trying to twist this around and say that I am at fault for thinking that when you addressed me, you were actually talking to me. I think your middle school writing teacher would have had to get the giant red pen out for that one, because you’re mislabeling your source.
August 1st, 2007 at 4:58 pm
I appreciate all comments here.
I hope to have a chance to say more on this topic. In particular to respond to some comments at Observing Japan.
Peter Pan I think Vimy assumed people would know the source of the comments because they were comments from the actual entry itself.
I hope we can keep the conversation here friendly.
August 2nd, 2007 at 8:47 am
Peter Pan, you need to chill out. I admitted my error. If you think I was trying to twist your words, you really need to step away from your computer and get some fresh air.
August 3rd, 2007 at 2:32 am
America is not innocent or a goody two shoes empire.
When will america appologize for the invasion of Iraq and lying about possible atomic weapons there? What about all the innocent people they’ve killed while policing the world for many decades?
August 5th, 2007 at 8:53 am
President Bush, as well as former Secretary of State Powell and current Secretary of State Rice (as well as many other officials) have said numerous times that they are “sorrow” and feel “regret” about the pain that the Iraqi people are going through.
Do these statements constitute an apology? One, a government official is making the statement, two it expresses “regret” or “sorrow”, three it nebulously describes the cause of the suffering. The US is also funding billions of dollars into Iraq’s infrastructure. See, it’s paying reparations! I guess the future government of Iraq and its people will have no argument since the US is paying up.
By Japanese standards the US has already apologized.
August 5th, 2007 at 11:56 am
“By Japanese standards the US has already apologized.”
Well, if you want an apology by “Japanese standards”, why not go to the source. Here’s the one that has been reiterated by successive Japanese governments for the last 14 years:
“The Government of Japan would like to take this opportunity once again to extend its sincere apologies and remorse to all those, irrespective of place of origin, who suffered immeasurable pain and incurable physical and psychological wounds as comfort women.”
The whole thing is here. http://www.mofa.go.jp/policy/women/fund/state9308.html
It goes a little farther than mere empathy for those who suffered and clearly lays the blame at the hands of the Japanese government, unlike Condi and Colin’s statements which are far from apologies. Powell, by the way, is no longer a representative of the U.S. Government. What he says in his current capacity, while interesting from an historical perspective - much like Robert MacNamara’s conversion - doesn’t really mean jack in this context.
I do, however, agree with your basic position, Danova. I’m not sure this issue has much to do with “intervention” on the part of the U.S. at all. However, I think the resolution is quite stupid, given the already existant apology above. But if the HOR wants to waste its time and its constituents’ money with this vote, then so be it. Abe should just point out that his government continues to support the 1993 Kono statement and then shut up and move on.
August 6th, 2007 at 9:47 am
[…] J-blogging Matsuri (Golden Dragons) on Top News in Japan — Monday, August 6, 2007Bryce on Comfort women bill approved by US congress! Danova on Comfort women bill approved by US […]
August 8th, 2007 at 2:48 am
If the U.S. has the balls to tell Japan to apologize then maybe the U.S. ought to ask China to apologize for diplomatically and militarily threatening Taiwan.
It’s ironic that we’ve turned our backs on the Asian region due to this misled war in Iraq. We’ve pretty much let China say “nah-nah” to Japan while the whole time, China bullies Taiwan internationally.
I definitely and strongly as a black/Native American, oppose this resolution. The U.S. can’t even apologize for slavery. I live in Alabama and for all I know, Alabama recently apologized for slavery THIS YEAR. I don’t know if the other states have done so. Go figure.
We need to stop being hypocrites, uphold Taiwan’s democracy and look China squarely in the eye and stop being too chicken. Japan hasn’t conducted another war in over 50 years, China’s preparing for war over Taiwan. I mean seriously guys…this resolution is the dumbest thing the U.S. Congress could have come up with.
I hope Japan doesn’t take it too personally. Japan’s like our ally, why are we acting like Japan’s our “lap dog”? Japan doesn’t have to be our ally. As a matter of fact, Abe lost a major election and his party usually supports the so-called war in Iraq and Afghanistan but the opposition party has been winning lately and they oppose such projects as they well should be simply because there’s more serious concerns like China’s military buildup and neglection on the U.S. part of Taiwan.
If China occuppies Taiwan, that would be Japan’s worst security nightmare and yet the U.S. State Department don’t give a damn about Taiwan because they love kissing China’s ass.
August 8th, 2007 at 10:49 am
[…] from Liberal Japan feels that the resolution is unproductive and hypocritical. Matt follows up on this by analyzing the text of the resolution, and provides a good critique. […]